These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Next Unified Inventory Update

First post First post
Author
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#661 - 2012-06-13 12:31:19 UTC
Gainard wrote:
It may well be only 113 unique users. In this thread. I know of at least three more threads I have posted in with 50+ pages. There are probably a couple threads more. There may also be some complaints delivered via the bug reporting system. However, most players never post at all. It's the same with a bad restaurant, most people do not complain, they simply do not come back.

Of those who do post the vast majority is deeply dissatisfied with the UI and CCP's handling of it.

You can not deny there is no thread with 100+ unique users that express their happiness about the UI.

You can not deny that what has been accomplished with few clicks before now takes more clicks and takes more time than before.
You can not deny that opening a second window involves the keyboard - that was not required before.
You can not deny that ship cargo does not open on login as it did before.
You can not deny the lag to display the windows' content when entering a station, which was not a problem before.
You can not deny that the UI is buggy - OK, that counts for all new content, but that does not mean it has to be that way.
You can not deny, that there is still no proper explanation as to why you forced the UI upon us.
You can not deny there was no warning from the SiSi users.

You can deny to revert back to the old system - if you can make the UI work for us then these threads go dead. You may even get a thank you here and there.

You may keep the UI without addressing our suggestions and problems. But people will quit - certainly not a majority, otherwise you would have more posts here. But its a revenue cut that is easily avoidable.

In business its always easier to keep your customer happy so they come back for more (in this case stay on) than to accquire new customers.


First, the restaurant analogy. The actual analogy is “A happy customer tells one friend, and an unhappy customer tells everybody.” This is why you rarely get vocal minorities shouting about how something is good. The first devblog on the Unified Inventory had 25 pages of happy feedback, then 25 pages of unhappy feedback. Almost all of the happy people were unique posters and did not repost later.

I don't deny your first point but would amend it to "in some cases" as it is not the case for all, or even most use cases.

I don't deny that you need to shift-click, but would say that firstly, sometimes things change, and secondly, I have been pretty clear that I have talked with the team about making this switchable with old functionality via a shortcut if possible and they are looking into that.

I don't understand "You can not deny that ship cargo does not open on login as it did before." - do you mean login to the client if you previously had it open?

We have acknowledged that there is some lag in cases of large inventories generally featuring containers. This is being worked on as we have stated.

As for the design direction and the Sisi feedback - that is not my place to comment on.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#662 - 2012-06-13 12:33:51 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Gainard wrote:
/rant.


Learn to EvE. The UI is not worse, it's different, and you clearly have no adaptability what.so.ever.


More clicks / time / attention is not worse?
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#663 - 2012-06-13 12:35:45 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Rrama Ratamnim wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Rrama Ratamnim wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwkqcVkmKpg please watch it and see what a botch us people who actually play the game are dealing with.


good video demonstration, though you honestly go off on tangents,

complaining that your cargo containers in tabs missing is annoying, its not CCP's fault you refuse to exapnd the tree and single click and use the treeview

the rest is kinda funny but all good points, truely recommend the ccp devs watch it its quite descriptive.


I dont really have the vertical space to use a tree view without constantly clicking and misclicking on some tarded scrollbar.
Im not a mission runner. In some stations i have 40 ships from time to time. A scroll bar that is on such a short window with that many objects is unusable.


umm minimize the ship tree, and click "ship hanger" when you want to see ship icons to switch ships etc... it just feels like your use of that sidebar item/ship window is you trying to force the inventory to be the old inventory rather than just adapting.

saying having 100 ships is an issue is moot when you just click the - and all the ships disappear from the treeview


Doesnt get around the fact that the space i have in the station window is otherwise unused. Also doesnt get around the fact that if that were gone i would have a single item height window to find everything.
I would rather quit than give more space to a container window, just because it shares space with my ships.


You could also try using the "Merge Item and Ship hangar" option in the ESC menu, which will place your item hangar and ship window on the station services panel (it even looks like the old inventory!)

I also suggest using the mousewheel if you are having issues clicking the scrollbar due to window height.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#664 - 2012-06-13 12:46:16 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:


You could also try using the "Merge Item and Ship hangar" option in the ESC menu, which will place your item hangar and ship window on the station services panel (it even looks like the old inventory!)

I also suggest using the mousewheel if you are having issues clicking the scrollbar due to window height.


I have done so for years. Theres a lot of inconsistent behaviour there. But of course you would know that because you obviously watched my video.
Gainard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#665 - 2012-06-13 12:47:03 UTC
Now for the constructive part:

Make the UI a button on the side bar. The treeview should then extend from the sidebar (without affecting any other window) at full length of the sidebar and be adjustable in location and size, which must remebered the next tim the treeview is opened.

Each container/window needs to have an item attached to its right click menu: "Configure UI" where we can set the behavior of that container (open in seperate new window, open in tagged view, open in previous window, open in "dropdownlist" wiindow . Plus one entry "Select window Info" where we can select and deselect price, no. of items, volume, etc.

A container opening behaviour should be depending on whethert opend in station, in pos or in free space.

Loot cans should by default open in tagged view (ask the users, thats my view) at the same location where the last loot can was closed and close automatically once it is empty.

Ship hangar, items hangar and ship cargo are unique enties and should be treated that way - that is without the UI.

if you insist on the treeview be available at all containers then make it at least expand FROM the window not INTO the window. Make it resizeble without affecting the original window.
My ship cargo is 3 Items wide and 1.2 high if I open the treeview gues what I can read - right, nothing.

Make the header and footer information optional. They take to much space. (see above right click menu).

Make the Price forecast more precise - it is way off most of the times, rendering it useless. Update the prices once on log in and store it locally on the client for the duration of the session - mayby add an update function on double click on the price.

More to come, wife calling...


Man, I train for certain goals and then the related skills / modules / ships get nerfed. I hate to be addicted to EVE.

CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#666 - 2012-06-13 12:49:45 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwkqcVkmKpg please watch it and see what a botch us people who actually play the game are dealing with.


I watched it. Thanks for putting the effort in to making this. I have sent it on to the team to make sure they all have a chance to watch it too.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#667 - 2012-06-13 12:50:34 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:


You could also try using the "Merge Item and Ship hangar" option in the ESC menu, which will place your item hangar and ship window on the station services panel (it even looks like the old inventory!)

I also suggest using the mousewheel if you are having issues clicking the scrollbar due to window height.


I have done so for years. Theres a lot of inconsistent behaviour there. But of course you would know that because you obviously watched my video.


Hadn't done when I posted, have now. See above for feedback.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

Gainard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#668 - 2012-06-13 13:26:57 UTC
Quote CCP Goliath in itallic (i skip most of it - no need to waste space...):
I don't understand "You can not deny that ship cargo does not open on login as it did before." - do you mean login to the client if you previously had it open? --> exactly. Did not yet file a bug report as surely others will have reported that too and because of upcoming bug fixes. If it persists after the next bug fix i will report - also the odd behaviour when changing ships while corgohold is open. In short when changing into a different ship the old cargohold is still displayed - yet I can not open an container inside said cargohold.

We have acknowledged that there is some lag in cases of large inventories generally featuring containers. This is being worked on as we have stated. --> There is always lag when entering the station and logging in (in some cases it is substential) compared to what it was before the UI.

As for the design direction and the Sisi feedback - that is not my place to comment on. --> accepted, I am certainly not putting all the blame on you personally - I am p***ed but I am not going to blame every CCP member personally Blink

As for the restaurant - that was not meant as an analogy but as personal observation - Maybe we germans are less talkative Roll


Man, I train for certain goals and then the related skills / modules / ships get nerfed. I hate to be addicted to EVE.

Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#669 - 2012-06-13 13:33:03 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
*snip*

You could also try using the "Merge Item and Ship hangar" option in the ESC menu, which will place your item hangar and ship window on the station services panel (it even looks like the old inventory!)

I also suggest using the mousewheel if you are having issues clicking the scrollbar due to window height.
I suggested the same thing (regarding the Station UI elements option) as a workaround in order to have persistent inventory windows display upon logging in or docking.

Feedback on the Station UI Inventory Windows:

1) Keep the user's last tab choice active (on top) when the user re-docks or logs back in. Current behavior is for the ship hangar to appear by default.

2) Retain the user's unique view-type choices per tab. For example, I like to see my ships via icons and my inventory via detailed list (aka the spreadsheet). Now, when I change a view-type in another inventory window, the station-based ship and inventory windows sometimes inherit (sp?) those view choices. That is highly undesirable behavior as I must click a few more times to set things back up.

In general, it is desirable behavior to have the user's view-type and window position choices (states) remembered based upon the "container" opened [in a new window or just the view-state in the same window].

Regarding the use of the mouse-wheel in order to scroll through the tree, that is a risky affair. If the Tree pane becomes active upon mouse-over, then that is a handy option. Of course minimizing large tree branches is another option, but, again, more clicks have been introduced into the process. And the risk of selecting a new container means more scrolling and clicks to get back to the original container. This is not desirable.

If a user must click on either the scroll bar or an element w/in the tree in order to make the Tree pane active, then this option becomes a burden. The chance of misclicking on another container and having to re-scroll to the original container is very real. That is time lost and additional mousing action required on the part of the user simply navigate around the Inventory. How does that improve the UI experience?

Honestly, I am bothered by the general attitude by CCP that EVE users should use this one inventory window and the tree in a relatively scripted / and limited fashion(*). Humans interact with User Interfaces in so many different ways and I firmly believe that it is the constraints (and M$ Windowsification) of the current Inventory UI which are causing so much frustration.

Formerly, the EVE Client gave its users nearly free reign on how / where to display inventory-class containers. This flexibility has been greatly diminished with the Inferno patch.

(*) - the shift-click / double-click options that replaced the elegant double-click and right click menus are kludges and are not even used in regular OS UI implementations. They are non-standard and require even more effort on the part of the user to accomplish tasks. tl;dr - bring back the simple double-click

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.

Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#670 - 2012-06-13 13:42:10 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
*snip*
As for the design direction and the Sisi feedback - that is not my place to comment on.
Whoa. As the lead Quality Assurance human resource, it is hard to imagine that Sisi feedback and bug generation wouldn't be absolutely critical to your work just prior to a patch release.

Many of the current design challenges and bugs on Tranquility were addressed via Sisi feedback and published to Tranquility w/o change.

You have hundreds of users banging away on Sisi generating defect reports + well-articulated feedback and you are disassociating yourself from that element of a patch? Something does not sound right with that scenario.

I look forward to reading the dev blog(s) detailing how and when the QA personnel get involved with a project at CCP.

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.

CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#671 - 2012-06-13 13:45:01 UTC
Hakaru Ishiwara wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
*snip*
As for the design direction and the Sisi feedback - that is not my place to comment on.
Whoa. As the lead Quality Assurance human resource, it is hard to imagine that Sisi feedback and bug generation wouldn't be absolutely critical to your work just prior to a patch release.

Many of the current design challenges and bugs on Tranquility were addressed via Sisi feedback and published to Tranquility w/o change.

You have hundreds of users banging away on Sisi generating defect reports + well-articulated feedback and you are disassociating yourself from that element of a patch? Something does not sound right with that scenario.

I look forward to reading the dev blog(s) detailing how and when the QA personnel get involved with a project at CCP.


He wasn't referring to defect feedback, he was referring to feature requests. I'm not a designer or a coder so can't comment on them. Defects are indeed my domain, but I don't control how the teams prioritise their fixes (this will be detailed in the devblog).

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#672 - 2012-06-13 13:53:23 UTC
Gainard wrote:

You can not deny that what has been accomplished with few clicks before now takes more clicks and takes more time than before.
You can not deny, that there is still no proper explanation as to why you forced the UI upon us.


Goliath, what about those questions then ?
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#673 - 2012-06-13 13:57:11 UTC
Rommiee wrote:
Gainard wrote:

You can not deny that what has been accomplished with few clicks before now takes more clicks and takes more time than before.
You can not deny, that there is still no proper explanation as to why you forced the UI upon us.


Goliath, what about those questions then ?


Already answered both of them. Read my post...

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies
Joint Venture Conglomerate
#674 - 2012-06-13 14:03:49 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Your comment about majority is way off. This thread has 113 unique users posting in it. It's called a vocal minority and is very common on forums, and it makes it seem like far more people are angry if you get a 33 page threadnaught going, but the average posts per user in this thread is 4, and 10% of the total posts in it have been made by one user. Approximately 45% of the total posts have been made by the top 10 posters in the thread, of who I am one. Someone trolling our devblog opening is not an indication of "the mood of many players at present". I don't debate that there is a number of people who are disaffected at the moment, but your estimation of their percentage of the player base is grandly overstated.

Maybe it is overstated but maybe gauging the reaction from counting forum posts is not very accurate either.

From the people I know in game there are far more who think the new inventory is currently inferior to the old one to those that prefer it. Most of them appear resigned to putting up with it rather than running to the forums to moan. Obviously this is only anecdotal but I still think you are foolish if you believe the people unhappy with it are a small group.

Will there be a player questionnaire on Inferno like there was on Cruicble?

Fear God and Thread Nought

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#675 - 2012-06-13 14:16:28 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Your comment about majority is way off. This thread has 113 unique users posting in it. It's called a vocal minority and is very common on forums, and it makes it seem like far more people are angry if you get a 33 page threadnaught going, but the average posts per user in this thread is 4, and 10% of the total posts in it have been made by one user. Approximately 45% of the total posts have been made by the top 10 posters in the thread, of who I am one. Someone trolling our devblog opening is not an indication of "the mood of many players at present". I don't debate that there is a number of people who are disaffected at the moment, but your estimation of their percentage of the player base is grandly overstated.

EDIT: "(no gameplay since 22.05.2012)" All this does is tell me that you haven't tried out any of the fixes and are just soapboxing.


This is a feedback thread. As I find new issues I add more posts about them.
I don't feel guilty or something for multi-posting.
I did not know I also had the "perma spinning till you relog 2-3 times" bug at first so I added it later.
I posted alternate solutions with screenshots about how to make the layout take less screen real estate. I actually feel I did a good thing to add such a post.
I did not know my 9 seconds of wait would turn into 39 for some reason. 39 is WAY too long so here I go, I posted about it again.

Not feeling guilty.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#676 - 2012-06-13 14:17:04 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Rommiee wrote:
Gainard wrote:

You can not deny that what has been accomplished with few clicks before now takes more clicks and takes more time than before.
You can not deny, that there is still no proper explanation as to why you forced the UI upon us.


Goliath, what about those questions then ?


Already answered both of them. Read my post...


Ummm, well not really.

You did a bit of skirting around some questions but have not answered these two.

Since this whole fiasco started, every single Dev has avoided the second of those questions. We have had the odd vague response about something like “it was a design decision to facilitate other features”.

So how about an actual answer this time ?

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#677 - 2012-06-13 14:22:12 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:


You could also try using the "Merge Item and Ship hangar" option in the ESC menu, which will place your item hangar and ship window on the station services panel (it even looks like the old inventory!)

I also suggest using the mousewheel if you are having issues clicking the scrollbar due to window height.


I have done so for years. Theres a lot of inconsistent behaviour there. But of course you would know that because you obviously watched my video.


Hadn't done when I posted, have now. See above for feedback.


I got an idea! (So much for multi-posting).

Since we got this new Neocom, could you please modify the inventory button as follows:

1) You add a new menu in the Open EvE menu

2) The new menu contains icons to open current ship inventory, ships hangar, corp hangar, items hangar.

Pronto, everyone are happy!

New players will just hit the 1 inventory button they get when they install the game.

We old players find those icons and drag them on our Neocom hot bar and are happy.

Please doooo eeeet!
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#678 - 2012-06-13 14:39:55 UTC
Jackie Fisher wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Your comment about majority is way off. This thread has 113 unique users posting in it. It's called a vocal minority and is very common on forums, and it makes it seem like far more people are angry if you get a 33 page threadnaught going, but the average posts per user in this thread is 4, and 10% of the total posts in it have been made by one user. Approximately 45% of the total posts have been made by the top 10 posters in the thread, of who I am one. Someone trolling our devblog opening is not an indication of "the mood of many players at present". I don't debate that there is a number of people who are disaffected at the moment, but your estimation of their percentage of the player base is grandly overstated.

Maybe it is overstated but maybe gauging the reaction from counting forum posts is not very accurate either.

From the people I know in game there are far more who think the new inventory is currently inferior to the old one to those that prefer it. Most of them appear resigned to putting up with it rather than running to the forums to moan. Obviously this is only anecdotal but I still think you are foolish if you believe the people unhappy with it are a small group.

Will there be a player questionnaire on Inferno like there was on Cruicble?


That isn't how I gauge reaction, I just wanted to prove a point that metrics > hyperbole. I also didn't say they were a small group, I said they were a minority - big difference.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#679 - 2012-06-13 14:41:36 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Your comment about majority is way off. This thread has 113 unique users posting in it. It's called a vocal minority and is very common on forums, and it makes it seem like far more people are angry if you get a 33 page threadnaught going, but the average posts per user in this thread is 4, and 10% of the total posts in it have been made by one user. Approximately 45% of the total posts have been made by the top 10 posters in the thread, of who I am one. Someone trolling our devblog opening is not an indication of "the mood of many players at present". I don't debate that there is a number of people who are disaffected at the moment, but your estimation of their percentage of the player base is grandly overstated.

EDIT: "(no gameplay since 22.05.2012)" All this does is tell me that you haven't tried out any of the fixes and are just soapboxing.


This is a feedback thread. As I find new issues I add more posts about them.
I don't feel guilty or something for multi-posting.
I did not know I also had the "perma spinning till you relog 2-3 times" bug at first so I added it later.
I posted alternate solutions with screenshots about how to make the layout take less screen real estate. I actually feel I did a good thing to add such a post.
I did not know my 9 seconds of wait would turn into 39 for some reason. 39 is WAY too long so here I go, I posted about it again.

Not feeling guilty.


Noone is trying to make you feel guilty. Multiple posting is not a bad thing, especially if you're bringing fresh material to the table each time. Posting the same argument over and over again is pretty futile though, as is getting into a slanging match with someone with a different opinion (again, not saying you've done this, just saying that it happens and has happened in this thread)

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath

CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#680 - 2012-06-13 14:43:36 UTC
Rommiee wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Rommiee wrote:
Gainard wrote:

You can not deny that what has been accomplished with few clicks before now takes more clicks and takes more time than before.
You can not deny, that there is still no proper explanation as to why you forced the UI upon us.


Goliath, what about those questions then ?


Already answered both of them. Read my post...


Ummm, well not really.

You did a bit of skirting around some questions but have not answered these two.

Since this whole fiasco started, every single Dev has avoided the second of those questions. We have had the odd vague response about something like “it was a design decision to facilitate other features”.

So how about an actual answer this time ?



I'll restate my position, that as I am not a designer, nor on the team responsible for the Unified Inventory, that it would be futile for me to comment on the design choice. This is the same answer I gave above (which is no way skirting around anything - if I asked you to teach me Swahili would you be skirting around the answer if you said you were not in a position to be able to do that?).

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath